The Mind-Body Problem at Century's Turn
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Brian Leiter (ed.), The Future for Philosophy. Clarendon Press 129-152 (2004)
A plausible terminus for the mind-body debate begins by embracing ontological physicalism—the view that there is only one kind of substance in the concrete world, and that it is material substance. Taking mental causation seriously, this terminus also embraces conditional reductionism, the thesis that only physically reducible (i.e., functionalizable) mental properties can be causally efficacious. Intentional/cognitive properties (what David Chalmers calls “psychological” aspects of mind) are physically reducible, but qualia (“phenomenal” aspects of mind) are not. In saving the causal efficacy of intentional/cognitive properties, we save cognition and agency—and even relational facts about the similarities and differences between qualia—but not the intrinsic qualities of qualia themselves, which are physically irreducible and thus causally impotent. As there seems no credible alternative to physicalism as a general worldview, and this is as much physicalism as we can have, physicalism is not the whole truth—but it is the truth near enough. [1. Cartesian Minds Eliminated] [2. The Collapse of Property Dualism] [3. Physicalism at a Crossroads] [4. Can We Reduce Minds?] [5. Living with the Mental Residue] [6. Where We Are with the Mind-Body Problem] [7. Beyond the Mind-Body Problem: Self and Subjectivity]
|Keywords||Cartesianism Mind-body Physicalism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Richard Warner & Tadeusz Szubka (eds.) (1994). The Mind-Body Problem: A Guide to the Current Debate. Blackwell.
Colin McGinn (1989). Can We Solve the Mind-Body Problem? Mind 98 (July):349-66.
Kenneth E. Himma (2005). When a Problem for All is a Problem for None: Substance Dualism, Physicalism, and the Mind-Body Problem. American Philosophical Quarterly 42 (2):81-92.
Achim Stephan (2001). How to Lose the Mind-Body Problem. Grazer Philosophische Studien 61:279-283.
Michael Silberstein (1998). Emergence and the Mind-Body Problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies 5 (4):464-82.
Jaegwon Kim (2003). Logical Positivism and the Mind-Body Problem. In Paolo Parrini, Wes Salmon & Merrilee Salmon (eds.), Logical Empiricism: Historical & Contemporary Perspectives. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
Colin McGinn (2001). How Not to Solve the Mind-Body Problem. In Carl Gillett & Barry M. Loewer (eds.), Physicalism and its Discontents. Cambridge University Press
Han-Kyul Kim (2008). Locke and the Mind-Body Problem: An Interpretation of His Agnosticism. Philosophy 83 (4):439-458.
Jaegwon Kim (1998). The Mind-Body Problem After Fifty Years. In Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement. New York: Cambridge University Press 3-21.
Benny Shanon (2008). Mind-Body, Body-Mind: Two Distinct Problems. Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):697 – 701.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #546,423 of 1,937,259 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #456,797 of 1,937,259 )
How can I increase my downloads?